DeepSeek Advisor

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description discloses that the tool returns a structured response with CONCLUSION/REASONING/WATCH OUT, that it is more expensive (~6x flash) and slower (60-120s), and that show_reasoning prepends a reasoning block. These details go beyond the readOnlyHint=true annotation, providing rich behavioral context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise yet packed with essential information. It front-loads the purpose, then provides usage guidelines, defaults, cost, and speed. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is logical. No unnecessary filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool has 4 parameters, 1 required, and no output schema, the description fully compensates by describing the output format (CONCLUSION/REASONING/WATCH OUT) and providing cost and speed. The agent has all necessary context to select and invoke the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema covers all 4 parameters (100% coverage). The description adds extra meaning: it explains the effort levels in detail (exhaustive, full chain-of-thought, lighter thinking) and clarifies that show_reasoning adds a reasoning block. This adds significant value beyond the schema's descriptions.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool is for deep reasoning via DeepSeek V4 Pro with thinking mode. It differentiates from the sibling 'deepseek' by specifying when to use it: when deepseek is not sufficient, such as for judgment under ambiguity, architectural tradeoffs, etc. The verb 'reason' and resource 'DeepSeek V4 Pro' are specific.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly says 'Use when deepseek is not sufficient' and lists scenarios. It also provides guidance on effort levels: defaults to effort=max for exhaustive reasoning, and suggests effort=medium or high for quicker reads. This clearly tells the agent when to use this tool versus alternatives.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.